# Is this a religious contradiction? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 18, 2010, 6:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-a-religious-contradiction/529450 "2010-02-18T06:36:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![raindog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/2bfe46/32.png) [@raindog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raindog)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2010, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-a-religious-contradiction/529450/61 "2010-02-19T19:04:31Z")
> [@Clothahump](#): > > Before that can be answered, one must first show proof of the existence of a god of any kind. Until that happens, you might as well make that statement about your favorite cartoon character. Of course you clipped _ **“A question for theists-how do you reconcile these two statements?”** _ which makes you a threadshitter, right? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2010, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-a-religious-contradiction/529450/62 "2010-02-19T19:11:16Z")
> [@Clothahump](#): > > Before that can be answered, one must first show proof of the existence of a god of any kind. Until that happens, you might as well make that statement about your favorite cartoon character. And what type of theist might _you_ be? ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2010, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-a-religious-contradiction/529450/63 "2010-02-19T19:25:17Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > OK, fair enough, my bad. But then you’ve just diluted the human concept of “love” to mean anything and everything that happens on earth. > > Not sure how that helps in practical terms. I’m not sure how you expect this to help, or what. Of course, I’m also not sure what specific issue you’re actually asking about. I’m _answering_ the question of how we can know what god means by the word “love”. To even ask this question means you’re leaving the door open for it to mean something completely different from what any of us humans think of it. (And it should be noted that the word already means different things to different humans - wife-beaters have been known to say they love their wives and I’m not inclined to say they’re deliberately _lying_.) So. If God is omnipotent, he’s not actually all that unknowable (or so says a logical analysis of the situation and terms as commonly given by the POE). This has rather drastic effects on the simple assertion that he loves us - his omnipotence allows us to rule out the idea that he is bothered by anything that happens to us. This makes calling his feeling towards us “love” a little like calling mount rushmore a shoebox - the label and the known properties seem a _wee_ bit irreconcileable. If we’re going to take it as _axiomatic_ that the label is correct, we have only one option - to presume that the label means something that doesn’t contradict with what we see, even if that’s not what we consider the common usage of it. Obviously, this isn’t the normal way of dealing with things - but when you start off by taking statements as axiomatically true, you sometimes get odd results. Of course, most thesits don’t go as far as redefining “love” when they claim their god loves people. What they do is, they don’t accept that being omnipotent implies that everything we see is an expression of god’s motives. (This is, essentially, ignoring the POE.) If you do this, you can use “love” just like you normally do, and say that God loves you, and blissfully go through life. And to reiterate what I said upthread in, to answer the op, when they say that god is unknowable, they typically mean that his methods are, not that his motives are. So there’s is no contradiction between that and the claim that he loves us. > [@RedFury](#): > > Indeed. For I see nothing in your prior description of complete randomness – as is, granted – that would include any sort of emotion as we know them I’m afraid I’m not parsing this. > [@RedFury](#): > > Could God think of a time when he was not omnipotent? Er, maybe? I’d think it would depend on whether the proposed God supposedly ever _was_ non-omnipotent. Sometime he is, you know - it’s in Mormon doctorine that he was once like us. Other religions would disagree, obviously. I don’t see what this has to do with the price of peas in Alabama, though. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2010, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-a-religious-contradiction/529450/64 "2010-02-19T19:55:20Z")
**begbert** , Short response. All I’ve been saying from my first post on this particular tangent is that there’s simply no way of knowing how the particular god being discussed in this thread interprets and/or shows what we call “love.” Beyond that, I am pointing out that your continued hypothetical speculations don’t help at all in terms of understanding what love is from that deities perspective. Other than that I am really not interested in a protracted debate on a deity I don’t believe in as all we’re doing is engaging in speculative mental masturbation. Lastly, I’ve already pointed out that even amongst humans there’s no universal definition of the word nor the actions that would accompany said definition. > [@begbert](#): > > …I don’t see what this has to do with the price of peas in Alabama, though. It’s an absurd query meant to reflect the the absurdity of the premise itself. In this case it points out that you can’t come up with logical conclusions based on illogical attributes such as omnipotence. So I’ll give you the only possible answer _I_ can come up with yet again: no matter how hard you try to respond, it’s simply impossible to know in ways that approach a factual response. Disclaimer if needed: I am looking at this issue as a mere exercise in logic, which obviously doesn’t work when discussing beings purported to exist outside of same. Thus from that perspective – outside of logic, i.e. faith – the opposite is true: almost any response is valid. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2010, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-a-religious-contradiction/529450/65 "2010-02-19T20:02:19Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > And what type of theist might _you_ be? Type _A_. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2010, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-a-religious-contradiction/529450/66 "2010-02-19T21:31:19Z")
> [@Triskadecamus](#): > > I suppose I was somewhat extravagant in my denial of understanding. I am not entirely in the position of the tabula rasa infant with respect to knowing God. I think that the far more common mistake made by men is to think that every revelation on the nature of God is understanding of the mind of God. Perhaps that blinding flash of comprehension seems that way, because of the prior darkness. To me, the dim twilight of my perceptions shine more brightly than all the human knowledge I have ever gained. But, in the humiliations that my pride have brought to me, I have found another wisdom. I cannot reveal God Himself. I can only bear witness to my experience. And most of what I can do in that regard is by actions, not words. I’m not saying that you must fully understand the mind of God, or that your understanding must be great, that faith must be the result of a reasonable amount of feeling of understanding. All i’m saying is that there must be, at least, some grain, some iota of a sense of understanding in order to define something. If you feel that God can be described as loving, then there must be some reason for that - even if it is only a merest glimpse at a vast and largely incomprehensible being. Now, i’d say that a fair response would be a different matter; loving someone, or some people, or all people, has a considerable effect on most people. It, to an extent, defines who they are. It’s a large part of their being. So I would say that when it comes to love, I personally would not be comfortable basing an opinion on such a vast subject from a small amount of understanding. To put it in comparison, I wouldn’t want to define what a person was like from being able to see an hour of their life, especially when it comes to such a defining trait as love. > [@](#): > > I have faith in the Love of God because He has sent His Son, Jesus, who is Christ, to me. He gave me the message that He loves me. He did not give me a message for you. I have read the scriptures, both those of current canon, and others. I believe that if you open your heart to the stories of these men who sought to know God, and make of your heart a dwelling place for the Lord, He will come to you as well. As it happens, i’ve done this, through a similar dialogue with **kanicbird**. I am very much open to such a thing, not simply in a sarcastic, “Yeah, let’s see it, then” way, but in an honest desire to learn and understand. So my intent here is not to get you to witness to me, but, as part of that desire to learn and understand, to understand your own perspective on these things. I would say that, if God does have a message to me, then to declare that you cannot yourself or through what I might learn from you be a part of that message, seems unreasonable. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2010, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-a-religious-contradiction/529450/67 "2010-02-19T22:05:12Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > **begbert** , > > Short response. All I’ve been saying from my first post on this particular tangent is that there’s simply no way of knowing how the particular god being discussed in this thread interprets and/or shows what we call “love.” > > Beyond that, I am pointing out that your continued hypothetical speculations don’t help at all in terms of understanding what love is from that deities perspective. Other than that I am really not interested in a protracted debate on a deity I don’t believe in as all we’re doing is engaging in speculative mental masturbation. > > Lastly, I’ve already pointed out that even amongst humans there’s no universal definition of the word nor the actions that would accompany said definition. > > It’s an absurd query meant to reflect the the absurdity of the premise itself. In this case it points out that you can’t come up with logical conclusions based on illogical attributes such as omnipotence. > > So I’ll give you the only possible answer _I_ can come up with yet again: no matter how hard you try to respond, it’s simply impossible to know in ways that approach a factual response. > > Disclaimer if needed: I am looking at this issue as a mere exercise in logic, which obviously doesn’t work when discussing beings purported to exist outside of same. Thus from that perspective – outside of logic, i.e. faith – the opposite is true: almost any response is valid. I am of the considered opinion that it has been very, very, _very_ solidly demonstrated that an omnipotent god _can_ be known by its actions. I think it’s this solid because this is basically the core of the POE, and the POE has withstood hundreds of years of counterarguments without being convincingly refuted. Thus, I am certain that your assertion that it is impossible to know is incorrect. There is an exercise in logic showing otherwise, for the complete class of omnipotent gods. And also nearly omnipotent gods. Basically any god that has both the will and the way to show his love, would. So what we see must be compatible with the love of any such god, if it existed. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2010, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-a-religious-contradiction/529450/68 "2010-02-19T22:36:22Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > I am of the considered opinion that it has been very, very, _very_ solidly demonstrated that an omnipotent god _can_ be known by its actions. I think it’s this solid because this is basically the core of the POE, and the POE has withstood hundreds of years of counterarguments without being convincingly refuted. > > Thus, I am certain that your assertion that it is impossible to know is incorrect. There is an exercise in logic showing otherwise, for the complete class of omnipotent gods. And also nearly omnipotent gods. Basically any god that has both the will and the way to show his love, would. So what we see must be compatible with the love of any such god, if it existed. Well then, if that’s is your “considered opinion”…guess that’s that. Meanwhile I choose to remain a clueless atheist w/regards to _God’s_\* definition of love – though quite well versed in the POE, thank you very much Toodles! \*or any other being defined as “beyond our comprehension.” ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2010, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-a-religious-contradiction/529450/69 "2010-02-19T22:45:48Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > Well then, if that’s is your “considered opinion”…guess that’s that. > > Meanwhile I choose to remain a clueless atheist w/regards to _God’s_\* definition of love – though quite well versed in the POE, thank you very much > > Toodles! > > \*or any other being defined as “beyond our comprehension.” :dubious: The nifty thing about logical arguments like the POE is that they apply to whole classes of things - you don’t _need_ to comprehend any specifics at all about the diety beyond the fact it’s omnipotent. I did remember to repeatedly ad nauseum reiterate that I was only talking about omnipotent and near-omnipotent gods, right? If the god was _so_ unknowable that you didn’t even know if it was omnipotent or not, then clearly my given POE-based argument here doesn’t apply. But then, no theist thinks their god is _that_ unknowable. They just want some mysterious ways lying around for when they need them - _specifically_, in the “what is god’s plan” arena. I’d be surprised to meet a theist who didn’t have some confidence about their diety’s power or preferences. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2010, 12:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-a-religious-contradiction/529450/70 "2010-02-20T00:18:16Z")
> [@Revenant\_Threshold](#): > > As it happens, i’ve done this, through a similar dialogue with **kanicbird**. I am very much open to such a thing, not simply in a sarcastic, “Yeah, let’s see it, then” way, but in an honest desire to learn and understand. So my intent here is not to get you to witness to me, but, as part of that desire to learn and understand, to understand your own perspective on these things. I would say that, if God does have a message to me, then to declare that you cannot yourself or through what I might learn from you be a part of that message, seems unreasonable. I do remember this dialogue, IIRC you prayed, actually 2x, to know God. I believe it is inevitable and actually is happening as we type. God is faithful and is and will answer your prayer. One of the things we usually have a problem with is God’s timing, in general why does He take so long. It is frustrating at times for the believer and discouraging for the non-believer. The best answer I have come up with is God wants to work through His people, and that takes time to get the fellow ‘to be believers’ up to the point where He can really start working through them (and you) to build all of you up together. A saying from a song, ‘He may not always come right when we want Him, but He is always right on time’. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2010, 12:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-a-religious-contradiction/529450/71 "2010-02-20T00:24:33Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > I do remember this dialogue, IIRC you prayed, actually 2x, to know God. I believe it is inevitable and actually is happening as we type. God is faithful and is and will answer your prayer. > > One of the things we usually have a problem with is God’s timing, in general why does He take so long. It is frustrating at times for the believer and discouraging for the non-believer. The best answer I have come up with is God wants to work through His people, and that takes time to get the fellow ‘to be believers’ up to the point where He can really start working through them (and you) to build all of you up together. A saying from a song, ‘He may not always come right when we want Him, but He is always right on time’. I prayed at least once to God, when I was a little kid. IIRC I was quite sincere. Guess that means that he’s going to come and snatch me up someday, right? (Presuming for a moment I was praying to the _right_ God, which may or may not be impossible to tell.) (That’s actually kind of a scary thought.) ---
**Author:** ![Perciful](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/b38774/32.png) [@Perciful](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Perciful)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2010, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-a-religious-contradiction/529450/72 "2010-02-20T00:52:15Z")
I don’t have the answer because I’m not God. I do know his love is deep and unconditional. I pray daily and get God shots all the time. Today I was offered a newer car. I have been praying for a decision on whether to fix the rust holes or get another car. God took care of it. I get grace and peace from God and many gifts that I never expect and out of no where. He always gives me the answer to my questions but it is on his time not mine. I like going to bible study to learn about God and discuss complex topics with others. With sponsee’s of mine that want to find God but don’t know how to pray I give them a small book called The Prayer of Jabez. I challenge them to say the prayer once a day and mark it off on their calendar for a month. After a month they are convinced because of all the gifts they have gotten just by prayer. I think we are all spiritual beings having a human experience and cultivating our spiritual natures is the icing on the cake. 1 Cor 2:9 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2010, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-a-religious-contradiction/529450/73 "2010-02-20T01:06:58Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > I prayed at least once to God, when I was a little kid. IIRC I was quite sincere. Guess that means that he’s going to come and snatch me up someday, right? (Presuming for a moment I was praying to the _right_ God, which may or may not be impossible to tell.) > > (That’s actually kind of a scary thought.) **begbert2** With the post above RT and I were posting, from what he posted I truly believe that He did ask God and God will answer (and is answering). I feel and know that God will answer RT’s prayer. I don’t have anything on your statement, this does not mean that God will not answer, but I just don’t know. What I can tell you is that if your prayer was from your heart, God will hear it. If you made a mistake and prayed to another god, it may cause some problems, but eventually you will find God. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2010, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-a-religious-contradiction/529450/74 "2010-02-20T01:25:13Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > :dubious: The nifty thing about logical arguments like the POE is that they apply to whole classes of things - you don’t _need_ to comprehend any specifics at all about the diety beyond the fact it’s omnipotent. > > I did remember to repeatedly ad nauseum reiterate that I was only talking about omnipotent and near-omnipotent gods, right? > > If the god was _so_ unknowable that you didn’t even know if it was omnipotent or not, then clearly my given POE-based argument here doesn’t apply. But then, no theist thinks their god is _that_ unknowable. They just want some mysterious ways lying around for when they need them - _specifically_, in the “what is god’s plan” arena. I’d be surprised to meet a theist who didn’t have some confidence about their diety’s power or preferences. _:::sigh:::_ My only point which appears to keep getting lost in our exchanges – thus I suspect my communicational skills are to blame – is that I am NOT basing my original query on our definition of terms (which is how the POE remains airtight) but rather on a God who is, by definition, outside of logic as presented by posters such as **kanicbird**. Absurd? You betcha. That’s been my point all along. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2010, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-a-religious-contradiction/529450/75 "2010-02-20T01:35:41Z")
To wit: > [@kanicbird](#): > > …I don’t have anything on your statement, this does not mean that God will not answer, but I just don’t know. What I can tell you is that if your prayer was from your heart, God will hear it. If you made a mistake and prayed to another god, it may cause some problems, but eventually you will find God. This is the kind of nonsense I am talking about. You CANNOT debate faith _with logic_ anymore than you can make a square circle. Trust this time I’ve made myself clear. Oh, and BTW, thanks **kanicbird** for making my point. Yet again. ---
**Author:** ![raindog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/2bfe46/32.png) [@raindog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raindog)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2010, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-a-religious-contradiction/529450/76 "2010-02-20T01:50:23Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > To wit: > > This is the kind of nonsense I am talking about. > > You CANNOT debate faith _with logic_ anymore than you can make a square circle. > > Trust this time I’ve made myself clear. > > Oh, and BTW, thanks **kanicbird** for making my point. Yet again. You appear to not understand the definition of the word, _logic._ Or are you simply _witnessing_? ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2010, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-a-religious-contradiction/529450/77 "2010-02-20T01:57:04Z")
> [@raindog](#): > > You appear to not understand the definition of the word, _logic._ > > Or are you simply _witnessing_? You think? Perhaps it is you that fails to understand the impossibility of using logic to debate [faith](http://www.tfd.com/faith) by the very definition of both terms? NB: I am not defending arguments based on faith. Quite the contrary in fact. Point still stands. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2010, 2:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-a-religious-contradiction/529450/78 "2010-02-20T02:23:11Z")
Example: through rather basic logic, the POE, as mentioned by **begbert** is a slam dunk. Yet until you get a believer to agree on using common definitions of the claims and counterclaims involved in the problem, you might as well bang your head against a wall as opposed to getting through to the believers. IRL, if the the issue at large comes up in conversation (mind you, not _argument_ as, again, it’s fruitless to argue vs faith) and I can’t get an agreement on terms from the other party, I’ve found that it’s a much smarter tactic to drop it and leave for another time – when perhaps the stars are in better alignment\*. Because 99% of the time you are more likely to get into a fruitless argument – and likely the deep dislike of the person you’re talking to – than you are to convince your interlocutor. ## Unneeded disclaimer – or is it? No, I don’t believe in astrology either. ETA: For my edification, what the hell do you think I am “witnessing” about? ---
**Author:** ![raindog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/2bfe46/32.png) [@raindog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raindog)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2010, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-a-religious-contradiction/529450/79 "2010-02-20T02:32:38Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > You think? > > Perhaps it is you that fails to understand the impossibility of using logic to debate [faith](http://www.tfd.com/faith) by the very definition of both terms? > > NB: I am not defending arguments based on faith. Quite the contrary in fact. Point still stands. Your links suggest to me that the answer is _both_; you not only don’t understand the word, and you are witnessing. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2010, 2:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-a-religious-contradiction/529450/80 "2010-02-20T02:38:24Z")
> [@raindog](#): > > Your links suggest to me that the answer is _both_; you not only don’t understand the word, and you are witnessing. Great. I’ll simply add that you don’t know what the hell you are talking about vis-a-vis debates between logic & faith. Be well. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-a-religious-contradiction/529450.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-a-religious-contradiction/529450.md?page=5)